Alaskan Leaders Speak Out Against Supreme Court Decision – And What You Can Do.
If Alaskans had any doubts about which elected representatives are working for YOU, and which ones are working for the chance to have their campaigns bought and paid for by the oil companies, here’s a handy list. I am proud of each one of them, and those that had the wisdom to elect them. They are patriots.
Five Democrats in the Alaska State Legislature today decried the US Supreme Court decision that strikes down laws that banned corporations from using their own money to support or oppose candidates for public office. The decision will allow large corporations to use their profits to buy political campaign ads.
The five conservative justices who made up the majority in the 5-4 decision said long-standing bans against corporate political ads created an unconstitutional restraint of free speech. Sen. Bill Wielechowski (D-Anchorage), Reps Les Gara and Max Gruenberg (both D-Anchorage) and Reps Scott Kawasaki and David Guttenberg (both D-Fairbanks) say the opposite is true, and that the court’s decision shifts First Amendment protections from individual Americans to Corporations.
Rep. Les Gara
“Today Corporate America took the First Amendment from Americans,” Gara said. “ It’s why corporate executives put so much money into past presidential campaigns – to successfully take over the Supreme Court,” Gara is a former Alaska Assistant Attorney General.
Rep. David Guttenberg
“This decision allows the sound of shuffling dollars to drown out the voices of American voters, and establishes a precedent for government to the highest bidder,” Guttenberg said.
Rep. Scott Kawasaki
In his dissent Justice John Paul Stevens, “The court’s ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions around the nation.”
“After years of undue influence over policy, I am concerned that now big oil and corporations will have free reign over the election process and be on equal footing with the average Alaskan,” Kawasaki said.
In a strong statement issued shortly after the decision President Barack Obama said, “It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Not only will this allow large multi-nationals to pour money into US elections, but it will increase their ability to wield political clout, holding policymakers hostage for fear of losing corporate advertising support and influence.
“This decision is a slap in the face to Alaskans and our attempts to keep big money out of politics,” Wielechowski said. “The Supreme Court has put out the welcome mat for influence peddling of the worst kind.”
Rep. Max Gruenberg
The decision may threaten similar state bans on corporate involvement in Alaska elections, and the five Democrats are planning specific actions to protect Alaskan voters from unwelcome corporate meddling.
We also have someone representing the interest of Alaskans and all Americans on the federal level. I had the pleasure of speaking with Mark Begich today on the Shannyn Moore Show about this issue. Hours after the decision was handed down, Senator Begich released the statement below. Congressman Don Young apparently thinks this is a complicated issue, and has to think about it. Senator Lisa Murkowski’s office said she’d have something to say in a couple days. I guess it takes a while to parse words when you’re on the wrong side of democracy.
Senator Mark Begich
U.S. Sen. Mark Begich released this statement following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court today allowing corporations to spend freely to support or oppose candidates for Congress or President:
“Today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision on campaign financing is a shameful step backward toward big money special interests exercising too much influence over American political campaigns. The campaign finance provisions struck down by the Court were the result of years of careful, bipartisan compromise.
“Alaska followed suit in passing some of the strictest state campaign finance laws in the nation. Alaskans want strict accountability on who gives to candidates for public office, we demand full disclosure and we strictly limit the amount that can be donated by individuals only.
“I’ll work with Senate colleagues to keep big special interest money out of our national politics.”
How hard have Alaskans worked in the past two years to get the oil industry out of our politics? Isn’t this why the majority of Alaskans actually voted for Sarah Palin to become our governor? We believed that she wanted to clean up government, and get rid of the special interests, tainted politicians and big oil influence out of the halls of the capitol. Isn’t this why we cheered the FBI as they raided the offices of legislators? Several of them are in jail or on their way. Every Alaskan needs to call their legislators, their congressman, and their senators (you can thank one of them). Tell them that we are tired of our politicians being available to the highest bidder. We are tired of the oil industry running our government. We are tired of corporate interests dominating the will of the people.
Find your Legislators HERE.
And we have a question. Where are the Republicans?
Find out why Senator Lisa Murkowski (202) 224-6665 and Congressman Don Young (202) 225-5765 have not come out forcefully against this kind of corporate and big money intrusion into OUR government.
For those of you out of Alaska, go HERE and enter your zip code to find your representatives. If you were ever going to call them, this is the time and this is the issue.
Any Alaskan Legislators who are taking a position against this outrageous decision, feel free to contact me a akmuckraker(at)yahoo(dot)com and I’ll add you to the list.
SO, WHAT CAN WE DO?
On a national level, Alan Grayson is introducing five pieces of legislation to address this ruling. Read them, and if you support them, contact your representative and encourage him/her to do the same.
Join the movement for a constitutional amendment declaring that only people are people. Sign the petition at movetoamend.org
Ralph Nader said, “I think it’s so bad it will provoke a backlash,” and has called this a “spectacular opportunity to educate the public.” So get educated. It’s your responsibility. Be able to talk about the issues in a non-partisan way, even with those you disagree with politically. This is not a partisan issue.
Here are some great websites you can check out and pass on:
Center for Media and Democracy
Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy
Read and explore, check out their blogrolls. Surf. Add them to your own blogrolls if you have a blog. Share what you learn.
Another great resource is Thom Hartmann’s book Unequal Protection.
How can we allow corporations to have all the rights that flesh and blood human beings have, plus all the privileges and immunities they have that citizens do not have? We simply can’t.
I am so proud that Alan Grayson is my representative. He’s facing a tough re-election challenge however because he does speak truth to power – and in this mostly white, extremely wealthy district, they do not like him one whit. They find him embarrassing, ignorant, and much too progressive. It’s interesting to hear the tea-bagger’s talking points flow from the mouths of the various bankers and corporate executives as they sit around at the chic bistros smoking their Cubanos and drinking their Grey Goose. Alan Grayson can buy and sell these folks several times over and they know it – they resent him because he can’t be bought – and yes, Alan can be a bit of a wild card at times. But damn! He’s my representative and I finally feel like I actually have someone in Congress who not only listens, but actually gets it! So, the United Corporations of America need to watch their back – we will not go gently into that good night, we will fight, and we will take back our rights as guaranteed under the ultimate law of the land – the Constitution of the United States.
O/T when is Les Gara going to Washington? We really really need him there.
Hartmann’s Cracking the Code sounds pretty good, too!
“Millions of working Americans talk, act, and vote as if their economic interests match those of the megawealthy, global corporations, and the politicians who do their bidding. How did this happen? According to Air America radio host Thom Hartmann, the apologists of the Right have become masters of the subtle and largely subconscious aspects of political communication. It’s not an escalation in Iraq, it’s a surge; it’s not the inheritance tax, it’s the death tax; it’s not drilling for oil, it’s exploring for energy. Conservatives didn’t intuit the path to persuasive messaging; they learned these techniques. There is no reason why progressives can’t learn them too. In Cracking the Code, Hartmann shows you how.”
http://www.amazon.com/Cracking-Code-Restore-Americas-Original/dp/1576756270/ref=pd_sim_b_3
great post,am very proud of our patriots……and the pesky bloggers who enlighten us with their doings…..
I posted on the Chocolate thread that I am reading Screwed by Thom Hartmann — can already tell he’ll be one of my “must have” authors.
His analysis of what is and what has been happening in America is spot on, and very frightening !
Will be hitting Amazon.com tonight for a batch of books
Don’t forget to get to Amazon through the handy Mudflats Amazon shop in the sidebar!
AKM
Happy now, fundies? You finally get your kind of SCOTUS, and look how they treat you. And all the Rs keep telling you it was all about abortion. You know, elect us and we’ll make your dreams of an abortion-free America come true with a conservative SCOTUS. Fooled you. Abortions continue, but the corporations got what they wanted with the radical right wing Roberts’ Court, and you’re still wondering why they’ve tiptoed around your issue for over twenty years. You folks must be slow learners to wait so long for the promised return on all your hard work and contributions, and then this. Bummer.
Given what her Screw The Planet bill might now fetch on the open market, Murkowski may still be inconsolable over her $124.5K sellout. “What was I thinking?” {sob, sob}
Get educated
Advertising isn’t the problem: it’s the ignorance, gullibility and passivity of American voters.
Thank YOU Mudflatter, for Showing US GOOD from bad. TRUTH TO POWER!! Also too, Thank YOU to all the GOOD Politicians, trying to do what is RIGHT by the PEOPLE. ____ (starts with an F) you!, to all the bad ones, you Know who you are, and SO DO WE!! (Please forgive My use of Common Language). I wrote YOU a NICE Crab Story over at http://angrycrabberscommittee.blogspot.com/ -PEACE-
@Greytdog…I donate/support Grayson all the way from California…he is a rare, necessary people’s voice in Congress…for all of us.
What happened via the Supreme Court decision is a travesty! I support Grayson’s legislation bills combating this very issue.
http://grayson.house.gov/2010/01/grayson-save-our-democracy.shtml
btw, if you guys can part with even $1.00 for a donation towards Grayson or the re-election of Barbara Boxer, please do think about it…again, for all of us.
http://blog.barbaraboxer.com/?p=649
THANKS! I appreciate your help in advance.♥
Well… as was pointed out yesterday at the end of Shannyns Show about Lisa M’s response. She has to ” think about it “. That means she will have to have
her ” Financial Benefactors ” ( lobbyists ) write and prepare a statement saying what she is ” thinking ” and what she believes. They have their Lawyers working on it… isn’t it that obvious..?
BigPete Says:
January 22nd, 2010 at 11:49 AM
Get educated
Advertising isn’t the problem: it’s the ignorance, gullibility and passivity of American voters.
————————————————————-
I agree wholeheartedly about education. I don’t want to go off topic, but as long as the American system of home schooling remains in place, where you have uneducated or ill-informed parents teaching their children, then this surely is a recipe for disaster. I don’t know enough about American education in schools to comment on that aspect, but I do think education or lack of it, is a problem that is now becoming very obvious.
——————————————————————
I am also very proud of my *adopted* Alaskan Democrats.
Y’know, I didn’t recognize all the logos in that flag. Not sure what that signifies…
1) I don’t turn on the TV nearly enough
2) I need to eat more Cheetos instead of any European cheese I can get my hands on
3) I’m an unamerican Subaru/Sony addict
“Today Corporate America took the First Amendment from Americans,” Gara said. “ It’s why corporate executives put so much money into past presidential campaigns – to successfully take over the Supreme Court,” Gara is a former Alaska Assistant Attorney General.
* ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** *
I’m not sure Gara knows exactly how right on the money he is about this, and it is a scary, scary thing. I finally watched last’s night’s Olbermann and everything he predicted could come true, and it will start happening no later than the 2012 election if we let this stand and do nothing.
I’m not the first person to think that the placement of these SC justices was not all part of a ‘plot’ that may go all the back to Richard Nixon, but was certainly in place (if true) during the Reagan presidency. It appears the Bush family is clearly in line with this alleged takeover and here’s where my Florida blood is running cold with fear – Marco Rubio.
He is almost literally Jeb Bush’s Godson. It was Rubio who hand-picked seven representatives on the Florida Tax & Budget Reform commission, all of whom had ties to J. Bush’s educational foundations, either by being highly involved at the companies that were their major donors, and in fact two were board members of those very foundations! The other picks on the commission (while not all republicans themselves) were chosen by Republicans.
This body seemed to think that putting an amendment in the Florida constitution to effectively eliminate the idea of a separation of church and state in our educational system was a nifty way to reform our tax and budget problems.
Florida dodged the bullet by the courts here declaring the amendment unconstitutional at it was removed from the ballot.
Unless any one of the Infamous Five of the SCOTUS actually voted what they truly believed and not as part of a multi-generational plot, it is highly likely that someone could introduce a similar thing at the national level, and the Supreme Court could rule it to be constitutional (I mean, if a corporation is a person, and up is down …).
When the next seat gets filled, and who fills it, will be of ‘supreme’ importance.
In the 2008 election, Barack Obama and John McCain combined to spend about $1 billion, a number that Politico’s Jeanne Cummings called “an unprecedented figure.” And the combined expenditures of the entire 2008 cycle came to “a record-shattering $5.3 billion in spending by candidates, political parties and interest groups on the congressional and presidential races.”
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BONUSES PAID OUT BY GOLDMAN-SACHS, 2009: $16 billion
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BONUSES PAID OUT BY JPMORGAN CHASE, 2009: $27 billion
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BONUSES PAID OUT BY MORGAN STANLEY, 2009: $14 billion
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BONUSES PAID OUT BY CITIGROUP, 2009: $25 billion
Level playing field? Don’t make me laugh. I hurt too much from crying.
I’m glad you guys up in Alaska have some representation who are standing up for you (and, by way of Begich, the rest of us, too). I’m curious as to what our newly-minted senator Scott Brown would say about this Supreme Court decision. Perhaps I’ll call and ask him.
Wow !! Lots of stuff to read. Thanks AKM.
And let us all remember what the old Greek dude said :
“The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.”
Plato, ancient Greek philosopher
I just received and email from Greyson stating that Congressman Conyers is allying with him against the supreme court decision.
Here is my prediction, for what its worth. Suddenly, Dept. of Commerce will see a HUGE influx of newly minted ‘corporations’ so that anyone with a dime who wants to ‘control’ congress can funnel money to their special interest politicians. I don’t want this to happen, but the handwriting is on the wall….
phoney corporations posing as ‘people’ to make such incredible donations to their party/candidate that the normal ‘real’ person’s donations will seem a pittance and be completely disregarded. So what is the point of even donating to a candidate of YOUR choice????? This dispirits me immeasurably.
When I was driving home, I heard a show on the radio discussing the business climate of today. (Talk about depressing). At the end of the discussion, the host asked the guy they were interviewing, in the interest of full disclosure, what stocks he owned and the name of the management company that employed him. If he had been talking favorably about his own company or stocks, the listeners had a right to know about it.
We are going to have to insist on full disclosure on the part of our elected representatives, and they will have to itemize every penny of corporate money they receive so we will have an idea who their constituents really are. For that matter, corporations will have to disclose every penny they are using to influence our politicians. No shadow companies, no bundling, nothing to hide. If they are free to donate so freely, they ought to reveal every penny and where it is going.
Sometime ago, one of the shows that pokes fun at our politicians had a program on corporate sponsorship. Our favorite sports stadiums are now advertising venues; even their names are linked to the biggest donor. Race car drivers’ jackets bear the emblems of all of their sponsors, from motor oil, favorite beverages and smokes to tire manufacturer. The comedian showed a picture of our political candidates, with the same corporate emblems sewn all over their clothing, showing who was sponsoring them. The only difference between that program and the Supreme Court’s ruling yesterday is that there will just be more of it, but maybe it will be out in the open.
AKM,
We think eerily alike. Here is a comment of mine over at HuffPo from last night immediately after the ruling was announced.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/21/supreme-court-rolls-back_n_431227.html?page=288&show_comment_id=38576709#comment_38576709
Supreme Court Rolls Back Campaign Finance Restrictions
BigSlick674 I’m a fan of this user 61 fans permalink
We have had a coup d´etat but the good news is we can still use the same old flag.
The Stars now represent Corporations and the Stripes now represent the FDA approved Political Parties that offer up candidates for purchase by the Corporations.
As a followup to what DinkyP mentioned above.. I got one of those emails as well. This is part of what it said.
—————————-
“We were all appalled by the Supreme Court’s sellout to Corporate America. Now it’s time to fight back. Tens of thousands of you have signed on to fight against the legalization of bribery and the corporate takeover of our country.
And I have some good news. House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers is our first ally.
As you know, I’ve introduced six bills that will help save our democracy. One of them, the ‘End Corporate Collusion Act’ (HR 4433), applies antitrust law to break up corporate political committees.
This bill has been referred to the Judiciary Committee for action. And the chair of that committee, Mr. Conyers, has signed on to the bill as its first cosponsor! Conyers is the second longest serving Member of the House, elected in 1965.”
Can you call Chairman Conyers and thank him for helping us preserve democracy? His office phone number is 202-225-5126, or you can fill out his contact form at: http://conyers.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.OnlineContactForm
Name that Füherer:
based on the flag our puppetmasters are:
CBS, Playboy, Coca Cola, ABC, Camel cigarettes, Windows
?, Prudential Insurance, Apple, Nike, ? Chrysler
Warner Boros, Wienerschnitzel, ?(bank?) Intel, Pizza Hut, McDonalds
?, ? , IBM, General Electric, ?, Bell (ATT)
?, Shell Oil, ?, NBC, Pepsi, ? (Qualcomm?)
I think some of these logos may be dated. But the sentiment isn’t.
“I pledge allegiance to the flag
of the corporate states of America.
And to the conglomeration,
for which it stands,
one nation, under many CEOs,
always divisible,
with liberty and privileges for some.”
DinkyP@15 Says:
I just received and email from Greyson stating that Congressman Conyers is allying with him against the supreme court decision.
* ** * ** * ** * ** * ** *
Well, if this is all a big plot, we’ll know soon enough who’s in on it.
The new litmus test of whether I want to vote for you or not is “Do you agree with the Supreme Court Decision in Ciitzens United vs Federal Election Commission?”
a). “It’s a travesty of justice to the American people”
b). “It upholds our First Amendment rights which are the cornerstone of our nation”
c). “Which Supreme Court decision?
If you say A, I will consider voting for you.
If you say B, I will not vote for you and will actively campaign against you, letting people know your stance on the issue.
If you say C, you are Sarah Palin.
#13 E in New England
After reading your post I turned to the family and said “What has our new Senator said about the Supreme Court decision?”
None of us had heard a thing. Zoë figures he probably doesn’t know that there is a Supreme Court.
Then I read #22 last sentence!
Excellent explanation of the SCOTUS decision yesterday…even if it, the decision, still doesn’t pass the logical smell test.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/explaining-citizens-unite_b_433140.html
Marilynn, my answer to your question is encourage people to vote for the under funded underdog, those who are steering clear of big money from corps. Use the anger Americans are feeling towards bought off candidates to drive people to the ones who should win. Those with integrity and whose hearts are in the right place. We can win this war. Even if this Supreme Court decision is overturned. We can use this anger and disgust to vote in good people, and most of them are dems, independents and very moderate republicans.
Those corporations should be pouring that campaign blood money into being better green companies and quit belly aching about being taxed for carbon emissions.
I hope this boomerangs back to bite the old school repubs in the rear! Bring on the backlash. And Scarah is one of the for profit fundraisers now, ha, she’s one of the rich fat cats, so unless she breaks rank to come out and say something negative about this ruling, and she won’t because they own her and they want this ruling to stand, she’s got no teeth anymore with the anger crowd who are sick of business as usual.
I was just reading about a young, smart guy who is testing the waters to run against McCain in AZ, he doing an exploratory trial to see if there is enough interest and citizen support to back him. He’s doing it grass roots style by asking 20.00, nothing bigger, from anyone wanting him to run. He put in place Tucson’s water capture ordinance, the first in the nation mandating a city to do this, in order to conserve and use more wisely our precious water supply.
From what I read he sounds like a guy who should beat grumpy, angry McCain out of his senate seat.
check him out…….if anyone knows more about this guy, please share, he started this trial early Nov. he said if there’s enough interest he’ll run. I think he could cream McCain on environmental and Hispanic issues. He’s a Jag lawyer too.
http://www.rodneyglassman.com/
Here’s another petition I just received from my mother:
http://www.savedemocracy.net/
you know what else will happen?…the corporations will use all their profits to endorse their candidates and then raise their costs to us to replenish their pots of gold (this includes you conservatives & repugs)…get ready for inflation like we’ve never seen! curses to those supreme court justices who didn’t do their homework or comb their consciences! is impeachment valid?
I get an error message when I try to send a thank you email to Cong. Conyers, maybe too many people are trying to do the same thing?
Supreme court judges caqn be impeached they need a simple majority
in the house to bring it to the senate then they need a super majority
in the senate. Guess that loss in Mass hurts all the more. During the MaCarthy
period tried to impeach 6 justices for passing laws that benefited communists. Here is a copy of the other impeachment that failed conviction;
the charge for impeachment fit our present supreme court:
Only one Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Chase (one of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence), has ever been impeached. The House of Representatives accused Chase of letting his Federalist political leanings affect his rulings, and served him with eight articles of impeachment in late 1804. The Senate acquitted him of all charges in 1805, establishing the right of the judiciary to independent opinion. Chase continued on the Court until his death in June 1811.
Thank you AKM, passing this on, also Martha Unalaska @26 link. I believe someone on Olberman or Maddow had that on last night (I was distraught and half asleep).
Hugs to all you peoples (o:
This court is truly terrifying.
Scalia in unilaterally declaring the decision of a case (Bush 2000) before the court had even sat to decide if it had jurisdiction to hear the case, broke one of the most important tenets of a jurist, to not pre-decide a case before the facts of the case are presented and arguments for both sides made.
He should have been impeached for that act.
The supremes broke their own house rules by stating that their decision of 2000 was never to be used precedent. The whole history of Constitutional interpretation by the supremes is based on precedent.
Now they are clearly breaking another of the major tenets of their decisions making, in not following the intent of the writers of the law, which clearly did not intend to include corporations under the freedoms and rights given to citizens.
And break another major tenet by not following an extensive and very clear history of precedent that gives Constitutional rights and protections to citizens but not to corporations.
In other words they are going to break any rules and trash the court’s history any time and in any way they want to to get the result they personally want.
Constitution, precedent, federal laws an regulation, facts, and reality be damned.
And there is virtually no means to stop them from doing that.
Excellent, AKM. Thank you.
@greytdog I feel like Grayson is representing me also.
Senator Staplenads probably checking in with Cosmo first.
if impeachment won’t work and there is no means to stop them as previous mudpups have said, then I fall back to my ‘cursing’ (and I don’t mean swearing) those supreme court justices that had a hand in this (don’t have an adjective strong enough) decision.
28 Say NO to Palin in Politics: I had the same problem trying to email from the page pulled up by the link, but when I clicked on the ‘Contact Us’ button (which looks to be the exact-same page) it accepted my message.
Worth a try!
Lainey and other pups, all we can do is sign petitions, write, call, email and try to have our voices heard. It feels bleak to me too but we can at least try. Pray if you feel it, hope and take it a day at a time.
And curses can be helpful sometimes o:
michigander…I am doing exactly that…signing, writing, calling, emailing, donating, and praying…also cursing.
p.s. to all mudpups…as you already know, although we cannot vote in other states, it’s very helpful to donate and write to political figures outside of your own state also too.
I’m proud of fellow Portland resident and respected progressive author and radio host, Thomm Hartman. He’s been spot on correct on so many issues. And, I really like Rep. Grayson’s courage and determination. I’ve sent him money for his campaign, and I hope the other Democrats step up to the plate like Grayson has. So disappointing to see Obama and Democratic leaders waffle and try to appease Republicans, because nothing will ever satisfy them.
I am at a loss to figure out why EITHER party would welcome the SCOTUS decision. Therefore, I went to some right-wing blogs to get their takes. Here is the general concensus:
“If the libs are complaining that it’s bad, it MUST BE GOOD!”
I kid you not – that is their mindset. I guess we can conclude that “If the libs think poison ivy and incurable cancer is bad, those, too, must be good.
michigander, great ideas, and may I add we can ask our candidates their opinion on the ruling and judge them by their answer, or lack of answer, or attempt to squirm around the answer. All telling.
We can broadcast that information as far and wide as we can. We can drum up discussions in supermarkets or wherever, “hey, what did you think of that supreme court ruling the other day?”. If they don’t know, we have a chance to spread the word about what it means. Maybe get them a little fired up to take action.
Maybe I’ll make little business card sized pieces of paper with links to a couple of good websites to have handy to hand out to people I meet on the street.
Which ones would you recommend? For concise explanation of what the ruling means, and for what people can do about it? (I have some ideas myself, but would like to hear more from the informed community that is The Mudflats)
Here is an excellent article from Veterans Today.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/01/22/call-for-immediate-arrest-of-5-supreme-court-justices-for-treason/
Say No To Palin In Politics: I also got the error message but got through by phone earlier in the day.
Wow….so many great links and ideas. Thanks all for your contributions to everyone who is posting. I have a lot of browsing to do tonight.
Lori in LA…Unfortunately, I think you are right. These people (and I actually am related to a couple of them!) just cheer anything that the left opposes. They don’t think or research or even worry about the repercussions. They just cheer. So sad.
AKM…I love the graphic. Hope you don’t mind if I use it in my endeavors.
I sent Conyers an email of gratitude for his support. I had no problem getting it through and just received a response (typical form letter thanking me for my input). I hope many will do this and that many others in Congress and the Senate will stand up and join Grayson in his fight.
I honestly think people are not realizing exactly how dangerous this can be. This has the potential of becoming a major global threat. Think about it!
Thank you to all for the comments and suggestions and general outrage. I’m in a small town in KS and every time I talked about this SC decision today I got blank stares or “what decision?” in return. I thought Quitty Pants had come to town! Being able to come to this site has kept me from tearing out all my hair and/or slapping my neighbors!
To add to my previous comment – I love my small town, but we have a tendency to not think outside our county let alone anything larger. It’s difficult to get people to see the big picture when they are struggling to pay the rent. Even though the big picture affects the rent!
I signed the thank you to Sen. Conyers. I missed a couple of boxes and had to go back and fill them in. All in all, it worked out.
I’ll send some $$ to him and Grayson at the end of the month. My donations to Haiti have left my charity budget for the month depleted.
Of course, contacting your Congresscritters is the thing to do and spreading the word near and far. Write to the President himself. He MUST know that the People have his back. He MUST also know what we want and why. He MUST know that we expect him to live up to the mandate that was given to him by his election but that we are prepared to wait for the time it takes to fulfill it. His first year has been a full one and if one bothers to take the time to look, he has done an enormous amount of good. The crisis he inherited is of epic proportions and, of course, overshadows much of the positive initiatives that have been started this past year.
As for Brown, I’ve said before, he’s the latest shiny thing and I shall keep my opinion of him to myself for the moment. I feel strongly that Cokely ran an extremely poor campaign and because of it deserved to lose the election. This is a valuable lesson to all. And, I don’t understand how 41 votes became a majority in the Senate. There are procedural precedents for getting things done. We should make use of them instead of squealing like frightened children at the dark. Enough.
Frankly, if there is a way to impeach any of the five Justices it should be done. In my eyes they are traitors.
AKM, excellent post. Thank you for all the information and links. I’ve already checked out some, but will look at the others later.
I think the thing I’m having the hardest time understanding is the reasoning that says corporations have the same rights as citizens, and even more. Some of the big companies are not even mainly owned by US citizens. So how does it make any sense that they can be allowed rights guaranteed to U.S. citizens? And for those corporate execs that are U.S. citizens, doesn’t that then give them a double way to contribute – once through their company and once as a private citizen?
The other thing that I thought of is that non-profits have been limited on campaining officially. I remember when my girls were in Camp Fire, they were encouraged to be involved in local and state and federal issues but had to do any of it out of their uniform and without saying they were doing it for Camp Fire. The same was true of teachers who could not voice their opinions about political candidates or issues, but could only encourage citizens to vote. I don’t suppose the latest ruling will change for any of those groups as they tend to be more interested in working for the ordinary citizen or for the environment, etc.?
LiladyNY, My thoughts on Scott Brown, and I could be way off base BUT. I think he is going to track much closer to the center than the R’s could have imagined, and could possibly throw a monkey wrench into the NO mantra. I would also not be surprised if he switched to an indy before his term is up. Running as a repug up there was a good move, but to stay in the game, he will have to move left.
I was composing a letter to FL reps to support Grayson’s bills, when the first one I went with was mine, Kendrick Meek, who is, co-inky-dink, the leading democratic candidate running for the open U.S. Senate seat! How perfect is this? He’s in a position to show where he stands on this issue between now and the Nov. election. And that’s what I asked him to do. I expect I will hear back from him …. OK, monday or tuesday.
Seriously, this is the litmus test. Ask Michelle Bachmann her opinion. Ask John McCain. Ask Lisa Murkowski (oh, you did and she’ll be gettin’ back to ya). Ask Rick Perry. Ask Kay B. Hutchison. Ask Barbara Boxer. Ask Carly Fiorina. I hope all the folks in Mass. bombard Mr. Scott Brown with what they want him to do, and he certainly should weigh in with this one. Everyone of them should. It’s a simple question. You think its right or wrong. Not a lot of waffle or wiggle room in this one. Quite frankly, I’m sympathetic, and from what I read of the judgment (not by any means all), the argument they came down with had a lot of reasoning, but in the end, I do not think that corporations deserve the same rights as individual American citizens. I believe that they can and should have certain rights but also certain regulations. So then, those that agree with the Supreme Court ruling should be delighted to sign on to one or more of Rep. Grayson’s proposed bills to regulate.
If not?
They’re just big Butt Pies!
Nothing like a little childishness at the end of a post!
I’m a follow the money/power type of person. What are the Robert’s Five getting out of this! Who in their families sit on what boards. Who wants to be elected to federal office! Come on, media! Check it out. Or have the corporations already bought you.
With prop 8 in California last year, I was appalled at how much money poured in from out of state. It’s our state, so it should be our free speech. And, while I’ll send money to Grayson and Conyers, I really feel that reps and senators should get the money from their own constituents.
How about tax free non-profits can they also run negative adds?
Forgive me, last page I forgot the name, please don’t give up. People do get it. The seriousness of this yes, to the point of …inactivity…moving…suicide? No, we have to keep on caring and trying, if not for our own families but for others. That is that in my mind. Only my opinion, but we only have one round on earth in this lifetime. We have one life here and we should make the best that we can for all of us. Well that sounded dorky )o:
“We should be aware of ignorance just as much as we should be aware of terrorism” ~ Benjamin Blech
*************
Although the above quote was made in reference to a different situation, I believe it fits *exceptionally* well with the discussion of yesterday’s SCOTUS decision and the public’s reaction to it.
I live in a VERY red state and was most surprised by the results of a poll conducted by a local TV station (CBS affiliate) about the ruling. The station runs a new poll daily, and by and large, the results seem to consistently reflect the views of folks I run into in the area.
Granted, the poll isn’t scientific — one has to ‘cast their vote’ on line, so that limits participation… at least some degree, but I’ve found the daily poll to be a good ‘barometer’ of my neighbor’s attitudes.
Since the state is about as red as a state can get, the poll results usually infuriate me… today’s results, though, totally and utterly floored me!
The poll question was: “Should corporations and unions be allowed to spend as much as they want on political campaigns?” The poll results were:
Yes 17.9%
No 82.1%
As I look at the poll results, I’m shaking my head at the 17.9% who voted “yes”; it appears they’re so lacking in civics education that they haven’t a clue about influence buying, corruption, and graft in politics. (I can only pray to the heaven’s above that the 82.1% who voted “no” realized the question was *not* a hypothetical one –that it’s now a reality as a result of SCOTUSs decision!)
In any event, I, personally, view the SCOTUS decision from yesterday to be among the most egregious examples of *internal* terrorism –ever!– perpetrated against this nation of ours; I don’t think any of us were prepared for the possibility of the ruling they made because even the thought of it was too damned absurd and outrageous to contemplate.
Which brings me to the other part of the post-opening quote…being aware of ignorance. I think we’ve all got our work cut out for us – being aware of, and reversing!, ignorance whenever and where ever we find it. Although I was heartened by the large number who’re ‘agin’’ the idea of corporation and union money pouring, gushing, hemorrhaging into campaigns, I’m not convinced those 82.1% who voted “no” know the reason *why* that stance is so crucial to our democracy; certainly the 17.9% who voted “yes,” don’t.
Time to roll up my sleeves, put on my best “golly, gee, that sure is swell” smile, and get back to work trying to make a dent in this area’s running rampant ignorance. Lord, but making even a wee dent is sometimes just so incredibly hard… beth.
[ Source of quote: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34973665/ns/travel-news/ ]
@ #44 Frank LI NY:
“…potential of becoming a major global threat….”
EXACTLY, Frank!
We were *already* in trouble with our US dollar, national debt, banks, real estate, unemployment — and consequently we’ve been the perfect cheap investment for foreign dollars.
NOW the supremes open this can of worms and make it possible for anyone, anywhere in the world to control our politics and the direction of our nation — with money. And in UMLIMITED amounts!
Outrage!!!!!!!!
Maybe we should sue, asking for the same rights as the “corporate indidivuals” have? …..
We gotta write all of those representatives, state & national!!!
#57 yukonbushgrma:
Maybe we should sue, asking for the same rights as the “corporate individuals” have? …..
………………..
We have those same rights. The problem is, we don’t have access to large sums of money as they do.
There they go again, those rethugs. Another proof positive case of their hypocrisy. Always demeaning any Judge that a Democrat wants to appoint as a ‘Judicial Activist’.
If this isn’t a case of severe Judicial Activism, then I don’t think I’ll ever see one. This is literally giving people (of a Corporation) two votes each. Since the electorate is supposed to be a private issue while voting, how can they know if the Corporations are playing both sides of the fence? holding out for the highest bribe? Now, we really do have to fear Fascism. If $arah doesn’t go rogue on Murdoch, she could very well become POTUS.
I can’t and don’t even want to imagine what could come from this unconstitutional decision………………..
Just posted my disgust at the SC ruling on The Facebook along with some links. Hope my network of folks, some of whom probably didn’t even know about it, will check it out, sign petitions, and pass the word along to their friends. If anything ever needed to go ‘viral’, it’s this.
Educating the people and helping them become aware is the sign of a progressive minded person. Thank you all for the compassion you show.
On the other hand, the poor people of Bush Alaska has lived under the thumbs of the Corporate Greed leeches since prior to statehood. Change is slow but steady. I count my blessings everytime I could influence at least one person out of thousand. Change is slow but steady.
Money talks…Bull **** walks….
but I agree with Nader…this is a GREAT opportunity to hit hard back….
I am going a surfing on conservative sites…just want to find out for those who hold the consitution so dear (as so do I)…what their response is….should be outrage..but will see….
I keep thinking of my dad….fought in WWII for freedoms and our constitution…never would have he or anyone of his generation think they were risking their lives for the rights of a corporation!!
My friend in Tennessee just sent this to me. A picture says a thousand words.
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/tmdsh/2010/tmdsh100121.gif
Except for Sen. Begich, I don’t know why these guys are complaining.
Seems to me that the state-level legislators have plenty of work to do in correctly AK law – see Troopergate investigation and Murphy’s ruling on backchannel emails – before they start complaining about federal rulings.
LiladyNY – I received several copies of that very same image and I encourage anyone and everyone who has their own blog to post that image.
Those are all wonderful quotes. But it’s all BS if you can’t smack down smiley face John Roberts and his fascist posse. Deeds, not words.
Beth at 56: The poll was flawed.
If it had said: “Should Unions have the right to spend yadda yadda” you’d have seen a 100% no from your red brethren.
If it had said “Should businesses have the right….” you’d have seen a much higher percentage of yes.
It’s all in how it’s phrased.
Remember, there’s lies, damned lies and then there’s statistics.
What happened to our history? We forget why our founders did what they did.
“I hope we shall… crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and to bid defiance to the laws of our country.” ~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to George Logan. November 12, 1816
United Corporations of America
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/uc/20100123/largeimagejd100122.gif
Just add in tort reform and the people will be limited in their ability to sue corporations. Nothing about it limits their ability to continue bad practices, and over ride justice with their expensive battery of lawyers. Exxon anyone?
Oath of Office:
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/umedia/20100123/largeimage.c072ffe927c4b957efcbe16b83841adf.gif
Imagine if Corporations were allowed to rewrite tort reform along the same lines the credit card companies were allowed to rewrite bankruptcy legislation or Big Pharma rewrite the Medicare Rx.
We are so totally screwed.
There is nothing we can do to reverse this. Anything law Congress attempts to enact can be declared unconstitutional by the Fascist Five.
And soon the Corporations will own ALL of Congress. They’ll replace the few congressmen we have left, like Alan Grayson, that see what is happening and try to stop it.
They’ll install their own puppet figurehead in the Oval Office and that will be it.
Once they take over public education through privatization they’ll be able to educate generations to never realize they are living in a fascist state. State board of education approves textbook adoptions. You can be sure corporations will control both content of the textbooks and which books get adopted. (This is why teachers are on the danger list and rounded up for disappearance when there is a takeover).
Net neutrality will be history so there will be no means to network or communicate or educate.
Patriot Act will take care of Public Libraries.
Librarians will be rounded up too. The educational elite (professors, etc.) are always on “the list” to disappear.
It won’t happen right away. We need to be made the target of those that feel oppressed and victimized. Once we are to blame for everything, there will be little outcry if we just disappear. The media will spin the public. This will be much more subtle and will take much longer than happened 80 years ago. It will be slow, quiet and insidious. In already has been. That’s how we got where we are now.
Communism. Capitalism. Two side of the same coin resulting in the same outcome. It just took Capitalism longer to deteriorate our democracy into where it is now.
Unfortunately “told you so” will be very cold comfort once it’s irreversible.
Doris “Granny D” Haddock
Campaign finance reform advocate
What We Can and Should Do About the Campaign Finance Ruling
What’s Your Reaction
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doris-/what-we-can-and-should-do_b_433204.html
Ten years ago, I walked from California to Washington, D.C. to help gather support for campaign finance reform. I used the novelty of my age (I was 90), to garner attention to the fact that our democracy, for which so many people have given their lives, is being subverted to the needs of wealthy interests, and that we must do something about it. I talked to thousands of people and gave hundreds of speeches and interviews, and, in every section of the nation, I was deeply moved by how heartsick Americans are by the current state of our politics.
If your brother-in-law has a road paving company, it is clear that you, as an elected official, must not vote to give him a contract, as you have a conflict of interest. Do you have any less of an ethical conflict if you are voting for that contract not because he is a brother-in-law, but because he is a major donor to your campaign? Should you ethically vote on health issues if health companies fund a large chunk of your campaign? The success of your campaign, after all, determines your future career and financial condition. You have a conflict.
Let us say, through the enactment of new laws, that a politician can no longer take any action, or arrange any action by another official, if the action, in the opinion of that legislative body’s civil service ethics officer, would cause special gain to a major donor of that official’s campaign. The details of such a program will be daunting, but we need to figure them out and get them into law.
Remarkably, many better corporations have an ethical review process to prevent their executives from making political contributions to officials who decide issues critical to that corporation. Should corporations have a higher standard than the United States Congress? And many state governments have tighter standards, too. Should not Congress be the flagship of our ethical standards? Where is the leadership to make this happen this year?
This kind of reform should also be pushed in the 14 states where citizens have full power to place proposed statutes on the ballot and enact them into law. About 70% of voters would go for a ballot measure to “toughen our conflict of interest law,” I estimate. In the scramble that would follow, either free campaign advertising would be required as a condition of every community’s contract with cable providers (long overdue), or else there would be a mad dash for public campaign financing programs on the model of Maine, Arizona, and Connecticut. Maybe both things would happen, which would be good.
I urge the large reform organizations to consider this strategy. They have never listened to me in the past, but they also have not gotten the job done and need to come alive or now get out of the way.
And to the Supreme Court, you force us to defend our democracy–a democracy of people and not corporations–by going in breathtaking new directions.
And so we shall.
What a woman!!!!!!!!!
Doris “Granny D” Haddock
Doris “Granny D” Haddock, 100 as of Jan. 24, lives in the woods of southern New Hampshire.
Doris raised two children during the Great Depression and worked at a shoe company for twenty years.
With her husband, Jim, Doris helped stop the planned testing of hydrogen bombs in……….. Alaska in 1960, saving an Inuit fishing village at Point Hope.
After the defeat of Senator McCain and Senator Feingold’s first attempt to remove unregulated “soft” money from campaigns in 1995, Doris became interested in campaign reform and led a petition movement.
On January 1, 1999–at the age of 89–she began a 3,200–mile walk across the country to gather support for the issue.
She trekked over 1,000 miles of desert, climbed the Appalachian Range in blizzard conditions and skied 100 in to Washington, D.C. after a historic snowfall made roadside walking impossible.
In Washington, she was met by 2,200 supporters and several dozen members of Congress.
It took two more years to gain passage of the McCain/Feingold bill, during which time Doris engaged in walking fasts around the Capitol, organized rallies in many states, and held demonstrations that twice landed her in DC jails.
In 2003, Doris had her eyes on the upcoming election, and so she drove around the country on a 22,000 mile voter registration effort targeting working women and minorities.
This trek was cut short in June 2004, when Doris heard that the presumed Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in NH had dropped out of the race days before the filing deadline.
Doris became the Democratic challenger, in a successful effort to pin down Judd Gregg in New Hampshire and help move New Hampshire to Kerry, which happened by a slim margin attributed by some to her campaign
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doris-
Thank you for this – thank you for the original post that brought it to my attention. Thank you and your very informed readers/posters – I like to read the comments and get to the links (the time though! where do you all get it?).
Just thank you. I’m trying to get the word out to everyone I know and sometimes being a real ass about it too (a stretch, I’m sure). It’s astounding to me that more people are not outraged. The apathy is amazing (except of course, when it comes to the every day guy with the truck, yes I’m from MA and depressed about it these days).
And thank you again for this blog.
Please help….Can anyone tell me why …..all of a sudden…… I get the following when I try to go to the Mudflats home page??:
Domain Default page
This page is generated by Parallels Plesk Panel – leading hosting automation control panel. You see this page because you have set up your Web server for serving a new site, but have not uploaded the site content yet.
I really like Guttenberg’s tie.
I think ties speak a lot about the man who wears them.
Here’s an idea. Let’s put the seats at SCROTUS (Supreme Court RADICALS of the US) up for auction to the highest bidders. We can have a Justice of Exxon-Mobil, a Justice of Microsoft, a Justice of Goldman-Sachs, etc. It’s a lot more efficient use of stockholder’s money since it’s much less expensive to buy 9 justices than it is to buy 100 senators, 400 plus congressmen and 50 governors.
If we’re going to completely subvert our democracy and our finest institutions, we may as well do it as economically as possible.
The Founding Fathers were an educated bunch, successful, wealthy businessmen who knew well how to use their mother tongue. Clearly if they had wanted to extend essential liberties to businesses, they could easily have said so.
I went through my copies of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights last night. I found the following mentions:
People: 17
Human: 1
Person 18
Persons 10
Corporation: 0
Zero mention of corporations. Just which constitution are our justices reading, anyway?
Thank you for the links, Mudflats!
Martha @ 77 – that happened to me late on Friday night! It was so annoying!! I thought it happened because I downloaded a google package but I was able to access the page after rebooting.
Caitlin O at 79: They already own 5. They don’t need any more.
After they initial outlay for 2010, 2012, 2014 and of course the 2012 presidential race, they won’t have to spend as much. Once they flex their weight, their costs will go way down.
I found out that the ACLU(!) supports this ruling using “free speech” as their (BS) reasoning. I wrote and told them how craven and appalling and disasterous this decision was, that the individual American has no chance against “the senator from Exxon”, and that I could no longer in good conscience support them and they will get no further donations from me.
Here is a thought that keeps coming to me. While Supreme Court justices are pretty immune to being unseated, these guys need to go. It may be out of the people’s power to make them go, but it is within our power to let them know that they did a very bad thing and can no longer hold the trust of the people.
What I would like to see is someone who is good with petitions to start one calling on these justices to resign. They won’t resign, but let’s say a few million were to sign such a petition. That would have impact.